Cockpit windows look like this >>>> 
Model teaser from HX model, partially physical.
- Thread starter panda_CAT
- Start date
qweyrhgf
Well-known member
Yes,we have to admit that HX finally got the 747 cockpit windows in the right place. But the cockpit windows is starting to get skewed, including the ANA, JAL, PAN AM, etc. (of course, this only happens on a small amount of them)... I can only say that HX needs to improve its quality control.Cockpit windows look like this >>>>
Aircrafter93
Active member
HELL YES, this is gorgeous!!
Agreed on the cockpit windows, but fortunately this colorful scheme somewhat hides it.
LachieHare
Active member
Oooooof that's gonna be making it's way to my collection!
triplecccharlie
New member
So it looks like our eyes were not deceiving us with the VH-OJS production photos.
Just based on the latest photos, the FD's variant has the more accurate nose and cockpit, whereas the standard wing version lacks the hump and correct nose profile.
I wonder then if it is luck of the draw with which fuselage you'll get irrespective of standard wing or flaps down variant.
Just based on the latest photos, the FD's variant has the more accurate nose and cockpit, whereas the standard wing version lacks the hump and correct nose profile.
I wonder then if it is luck of the draw with which fuselage you'll get irrespective of standard wing or flaps down variant.
Pacific
Member
HX has actually been aware of this issue, but production was already nearly complete at that time.
Moreover, HX is developing a new wing mold. It will be fine to just give them a little time.
In my opinion, there are very few brands that are willing to interact and communicate with consumers while respecting us like this.
Every brand will have problems, big or small. The fact that we pay so much attention to HX's models actually shows that we have great expectations for them.I believe they will gradually address this issue to respond to our expectations.
I've always wonder if HX 748 mould has any connection to JC? It just looks very similar (especially the forehead, the bump). Maybe it's my eyes but the more I look at it the more I think it's a modification of JC's. Now I've bought a few they are excellent anyways.
Excuse my exaggerated version, but this is what I mean. The forehead bump on JC/HX looks very circular-ish (not with the 744, just the 748), whereas the NG is correct (more smooth.
Excuse my exaggerated version, but this is what I mean. The forehead bump on JC/HX looks very circular-ish (not with the 744, just the 748), whereas the NG is correct (more smooth.
Last edited:
Phantom
Well-known member
Isn't most of HX/SQ stuff "inspired by" JC?
that drawing is comical but 100% understandable lol
Yes, I agree with you. The hump on the JC wings version is quite ugly and sadly this HX version is also not so good.
For the 747 Classics and B747-400F, the hump shape looks perfect though.
Pacific
Member
So how do you know the truth? What if they were actually from the same place?Isn't most of HX/SQ stuff "inspired by" JC?
I have heard a lot about this topic. My personal opinion is, donāt jump to conclusions unless you are sure enough of the truth.
Phantom
Well-known member
I don't know but I have eyes. And what I see are moulds that share some very distinct JC errors. Being it the upperdeck on the above 748F, too long pylons on GE/PW powered 744s or erroneousely shaped v.tails on the 200 scale 737NGs, just to name three.
Pacific
Member
Well I donāt think it really supports the word āinspireā. I donāt know if you can get it.
Aircrafter93
Active member
They are 'enhanced' carbon copies. It is obvious to me as well, especially with the winglet shape on the SQ 1:200 MD-11, to name one.
Phantom
Well-known member
No, I honestly don't get your message here.
If it's the "inspired by", you might replace it with "copied from". But then again, I don't know anything about the legal stuff (who holds which rights for what. JC, DPM, both or whoever..?) - and I don't care.
Great thing with scaled replicas is, in the end they all should look identical. But if two products share near identical "features" (=flaws) without technical need then it's quite obvious.
I know SQ copied lots of stuff from JC in other moulds. But here with the B747-8, if this is another JC copy, why would they make the wing root design so much worse on their "own" version? That doesn't make sense to me. If you copy, you copy or improve parts that you think you can do better. But make it worse?
Pacific
Member
Well obviously I didnāt replace it with ācopiedā. As I said, what if they were actually produced in the same place?
I mean maybe thereās no inspiration anywayā¦ So what do you mean by saying that?
For the flaws I would like to say it happens in every brand. For me itās the best if any brand gets everything right at the beginningā¦ however even Boeing or Airbus are not capable to do that. I might also consider like the overall appearance of the model and how the brand interacts with consumers. Hope they will make active improvements in the future.
Pacific
Member
Someone told me that these moulds were made by the same people. I canāt say itās definitely true, but I think itās a bit too early to use the word ācopyā? Just my personal thoughts anyway, sorry in advance if it annoys you.
Phantom
Well-known member
Inspired by, copied from, done by the same people or in the same place.
It doesn't make a difference for the collector. Some elements of these HX/SQ models repeat pretty distinct errors done before no matter what we call it.
I love how HX is catering the market and wish they venture more into subjects I'm interested in (1950's to 70's) - with genuinely new researched and designed moulds. As for the moment I'm hoping for some refinements for their 747Classics.
Similar threads
